"Isocrates Lu" (cited in this paper only note the page number) can be described as Plato with as only with modern linguistic philosophy is directly related to the dialogue. It focuses on examining the correctness of the "name" question: what is the root cause of the right to be given something? Dialogue two protagonists Hector Mogenni and Isocrates Lu were given two opposing answer, commonly known as "artificial conventionalism" and "naturalism" theory of names. As a third party of Socrates reveals two view implied the difficulties and problems, especially the antagonism of their surface behind the deep unity, namely Hector Mogenni "artificial conventionalism" name theory eventually and as a "naturalistic" Heraclitus main rheological theory is interlinked, "people agreement" is only rheological nature of an anthropological variant. But "Kratylos article" is not only a critical or suspense, in fact, Platon borrowed Socrates presents a "name" as the origin of the name is correct, and overcome the previous two theory fundamentally: name must be some man-made factors, but not as "people agreed" claimed that everyone can agree; named specialized technicians according to the "natural" and the name, but he is not based on the so-called "naturalist" as the "natural state" of the "flow", but as "natural essence" of the concept represented by the "idea". The essence of "a naturalism" name theory not only makes the correct name as possible, but also makes the name or the language itself may become. The concrete scheme is: according to the "nature" and "name". Through as described a technique of the naming of the elements or aspects of the basic system, Plato not only for rationalism theory of language foundation, and exemplify the Greek thought from "nature" to "technical" paradigm transformation.
A
In the early natural philosophy, "phusis, mainly refers to the" growth process "and" things generated raw materials or substances primitive / matrix "," growth process "is of course a rheological process, and" the primitive substance "is" live ", changeable, of all things.
Platon once explicitly accused of "material nature" and "non design". (see "892B", "", "265C" is not difficult to speculate, in the eyes of Platon, early thinkers, "phusis" concept is usually and "chaos", "" "" "" "" "," "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ". The so-called "natural" name of the "Lu" is called "according to nature" in the sense that it is used and criticized.
Perhaps it is because of the word "phusis" in everyday language and academic language in Greek are too common, but also a commendatory term, Platon flatly rejected and unable to get rid of it, had to "put new wine into old bottles". Therefore, "Phusis" has two kinds of core in Platon's Theory of being in use: first of all, "phusis" is used to mean the whole concept of "world". (see "Phaedo", "Utopia", 103b5; 597b6, 598al) than the previous average or the so-called "natural world", but "the phenomenon of the world / the world / nature world" concept constitutes the strict sense of the "phusis" second, '? "Phusis" is that individual concept in the world, they are the natural essence of macross. (see "Symposium", 210e4-5; "ideal country", 490a8-b3, 501b2-3), in the Isocrates Lu ", as" nature "of" pH "is how to develop the useful and discard the useless as a" natural state (i.e. rheological) Phusis "" ", and in the construction of theory of names by step achieved the dominant position? Plato has taken the usual "analogue", the paper first proves things "nature" -- the taken for granted in our view point of view in Plato's time but the onslaught. Distinguishable by resorting to the wisdom and stupid, good and bad, Socrates, first of all, both refused Protagoras of relativism (things that they to anyone present), also rejected the view of the paradox of the European Xude mo (anything is not something). Obviously, these are also effective in the "evolution". Thus, he put his name theory based on a solid, essentialism objectivism ontology, namely things indeed has its own constant nature or "nature". "If not all things (pa/ito) is always in the same way with respect to any one person and there is what / /, not every one thing is private, for any one person then, obviously, with some things belonging to its own stable being / what / what: they are not relative to the US, not as they appear to us and cranky, but by itself, with respect to its own natural beings / what is / what / what / what is there. "(386d8-e4) here" panta, 'hint we he targeted the Protagoras "man is the measure of all things", "all things", and "bebaion (stable)" is directed at "flow", epistemological relativism and rheological naturalism is he opposed that idea is one of the two sides, "stable beings / what / what" due to its independence to the subject and get rid of subjects but the eternal self. In order to emphasize the objectivity of the essence of things, Platon continuously with "echonta auta (own)" "Kath, hauta (free)" "hauton (since the genus)" and "pepkuken" description "?""
"Socrates" then applies the above-mentioned conclusion to "behavior", and "behavior" also has "nature", which can be divided into two parts: direct and indirect. On the one hand, the nature of behavior is directly derived from the nature of the act itself. "Since language is a kind of behavior, then the right words should be in accordance with the nature of the language and the use of natural tools for the language of nature." (387b8-c2) is to say that there is a need to be in agreement with the nature of the language of the language of one thing, which is a necessary condition for language. Language is a complex behavior, the name or the use of the name is one of the elements, people use the name say the sentences, just as the use of brick to build a house. This means, also named as speech generally has its own nature. Therefore, we must also to nature as well as the name and nature named tool to name things, rather than arbitrary recklessly ". (387d4)" Socrates "through to explore the behavior of nature to determine" named "behavior correctness criteria: object nature determines the behavior and concrete way of naming, which is a kind of objective and stability constraints. Here, Platon neither distinguishes between "statement" and "naming" of "speech" and other "technology" activities, nor does it distinguish between "statement" and "name" itself. From the point of view of technology manufacturing activities, the "tool" is the most important consideration. The origin of instrumentalism of language. Socrates said:"...... What do we do when we use the name of the tool as a tool?...... We teach each other something, and we divide them according to the echei he...... The name is a kind of teaching and divided nature tool, as the shuttle from the network." (388a8-cl) the so-called "name is a tool for teaching and dividing the 'essence'", which seems to "teach" first, "the division of nature" in the post, but more and more scholars believe that the name is taught by the division of nature; strictly speaking, the division of nature and education is the same function of the name and not the two independent functions. (cf. Ackrill, pp.41 - 42. Reeve, P. 10; Sedley, pp.60 - 61. Barney, P. 45) first, "to teach didaskein not ordinary language users, but dialectical Legalism and of teacher's specialized technology, with each name to convey the nature of the named and the implementation of the, the instructor using the name of the division of" beings (being) "not the everyday perception of being, but are" nature (. Contains the essential differences between &?. "or" this is (he echei 'according to Plato consistent usage, which is named things the and unique properties or characteristics that Socrates's question "what is x?" the answer specified and determine or define shows things; and the name was able to show things, the key lies in the fact that on the one hand, the name "classification": a name, because it is a given language vocabulary in the fixed part, divided into a as a species, for example, we used the name "team wooden bird" and "cuckoo bird" or "Swan" are distinguished. This fact suggests that we have a knowledge of the existence of a species of wood, which is corresponding to the division of the late Platon dialogue. (cf-Kretzmami, P. 128) on the other hand, the name implies "analysis": a name, by describing its object, dividing the nature of its object into a being or defining the composition, for example, the name "woodpecker", which is divided into "wood" and "pecker", which indicates that it is a kind of thing that is distinguished by its activity. Actually, people like to use "portmanteau (portmanteau forms)" unnamed species coined a new name, the purpose is to let the nature of the object immediately clear. It can be seen that the analysis of the origin of the long words of the "Lu Lu" of "carat bottom" provides evidence for this. (cf.Sedley, P. 60) the name of the "classification" and "analysis" reveals the intrinsic characteristics of the named person, which is different from other things, so as to convey or "teach" the important information about the named. Obviously, "dividing the nature" is "communication" or "teaching" of the premise, there is no this premise, theory of names will slide into "human a conventionalism". Because the name "communicate" or "teaching" the function is neutral, between the "essence of a naturalist" and "a man about doctrine" remain neutral, and the two theories that. Therefore, to maintain the "essence of a naturalistic" name theory, it is necessary to maintain the "division of nature" in its entire naming activities in the primary.
二
In accordance with the general rules of "technology" of Plato, since the "name" of the manufacturing is a non for everyone's expertise, you must have the "technicians / artisan", namely "masters": "don't you can't tells us who put our name to our?? - No. - you don't think it's the custom law? - it looks like it is. -- so, when teaching the expert to use the name, will he use the product of the legislator? -- I see. - but do you think that everyone is' legislators', or is it the person who owns it? - people who have this technology. - so, Hector Mogenni ah, the name is something of a class name maker, but not everyone can; and this seems to be the legislator, all mortal beings most scarce a craftsman. " (-389a3 388d9) it is strange that the "onomatourgos" is often referred to as "nomotfeetes", that is, to set the law or the customs of the people that are "legislators". This kind of terms on the exchange of three aspects of confusion: first, whether the "Nomm" is "thesis" is the standard of "artificial one" term. Why is Platon's "nature of a naturalism" to be invoked?
Is the "NOMAS" and "phusis" in "the end of the carat" is not entirely opposed? Second, the "onomatourgosy" (why is it called "nomothetesy?" Finally, the system name of "teacher" or "legislator" is a historical event which concerns the origin of language?
It is true that more and more scholars believe that the relationship between "shame" and "phusis" in "the" "phmis" is quite different from that in the fifth Century." （Sedley, p. 68）柏拉图不是要彻底抛弃“nomas”（无论习俗还是法律），而是要为它添加一个限制，那就是“phusis”（自然本质）；就名称而言，自然主义理论并不否认其中的“设定”活动，但这“设定”绝非单纯人为的“mntheke kaihomologia”（协约与同意），而是还有一种使得名称具有正确性的客观标准：受到“phusis” （自然本质）制约的“norms”要么合乎某些客观的自然标准，要么根本不是真正的“nomas”.而且，当且仅当某人有能力把握这些客观的自然标准，他才是真正的“nomas”的确立者或“立法者”,而既然这样一种能力由一种特殊的“技术-），’所提供，那么，当柏拉图说制名是一门非人人可为的”技术“时，他巳经将”phusis“合人”norrm“ 了，可以说”技术“乃是”nomos“与”phusis“得以统合的纽带。 Obviously, "legislators" for having a special "technology" to "based on the method of natural standing", is not limited to "name", but for the social life aspects are effective.
Whether this means that the mixed "teacher" and "legislators" dual identity "the most scarce builders" is the political significance of legislation are legislators?? Because they seem to have the power to make all kinds of rules, including the language, and to impose it on the people.
In view of Plato in the Gorgias had established a "legislative technology" and given the lofty status (cf.464b-465c), and the cause of the Republic was repeatedly describe as "legislation" activities (cf.403b, 456b, the min), this speculation is not without reason. But it is based on the interpretation of the cratylus ", the Epicureans argue that in the beginnings of the language how can there be people have been in people with the necessary political structure will language specification is imposed on people, how can they call language is not yet understood those summoned the people? As "the scarcest craftsman", they may not is "legislative politics were", because the latter in the then Greek city-state abound. Thus, some scholars think that they should be Platon's "" hypothesis ". (P., cf.Sedley 69), this argument is interesting. First of all, the invention of the name and legislative associations are not Plato, but traditional themes: any attempts to analysis the etymology of the way of the name "Ma" people are will its etymology and honomos' linked, to belong to the origin of language a anonymous "legislators". Because of this, this text in introducing "legislators", "Socrates" first show is "Ho NOMAS the ommata provided to us cf.388d), Hector Mogenni and Isocrates Lu and other participants in the conversation not unfamiliar with this. But there is a fundamental difference between tradition and Platon: that the former would call the so-called "hypothetical" language of the legislator "a great genius of a certain historical moment, and then it is the one that should have such a language, but it is not important for Platon to be a man, one or more, but not a man. In short, Plato does not mean that have one or several language legislation that is responsible for the origin of the existing language, but if you want to have a proper name (or ideal language), you must have special skills, language or are familiar with things nature of participants said lawmakers, past, present and future, is no exception.
For a long time, scholars have thought that the theme of "Lu Lu" is the origin of language, and thus the lack of philosophical significance, in Platon's dialogue is the least important. Robinson criticized this view points out its two sources: (1) the origin of the name problem soon become common topic of other Greek thinkers, such as PW in Plato's discussion name is correct and Epicurus discussed the origin of the name are particularly prominent, easy to make people mistakenly to Plato also talk about the origin. (2) dialogue mentioned "the name of the ancients" 411b, the earliest Greek "397c," legislators "or" of people "or" the name of the set "389al 389d, very easy to be envisaged as a Solon historical figures, and deduce from that Plato is in history, describing human began to speak of things, and etymology and strengthen this impression.
Robinson thought that "he" is not a history but as a myth mechanism, in order to facilitate an abstract theory. Platon has no interest in the origin of language? Words in the name of independent almost a saint sometime, somewhere in the actual manufacture name, he cares about is necessary condition to build up the logic of the ideal way to name or the correct name. (Robinson cf.) "the theme of" the carat "and the" legislators "is intended to lay a theoretical foundation for the ideal language, the general specification of the language, and not any particular historical situation is the fundamental concern of Platon's philosophy of language. If apply modern philosophers like the "description" and "correction" or "descriptive" and "normative" distinction, Plato is a modified metaphysician rather than describe the metaphysicians. His moral philosophy, city-state politics science and cosmology are modified than described. Similarly, he does not care about descriptive linguistics, but only concerned about the modified linguistics, that is, the language of the general normative ideal model. For the "Socrates" in the "Lu", this is the general standard of "master teacher" in the manufacture of the correct name must follow the "model Qparadeigmatay, it is expressed as" the idea of ":" the idea of "imitation" name "is in line with the nature". In this way, we have come to the most important part of the theory of "the name of Platon".
三
The establishment of the model of perfect but all modifications of thought or standard theoretical problem in the proper meaning, and to Plato. This is any real "technology" of the necessary elements: general form, appearance, and the ratio of function and so on basic properties of it contains the workman made products, which makes technology manufacturing activities must accept the restriction of some objective rules, don't obey arbitrary personal choice. Plato to classical era social life in Greece in the "manufacturing technology" as the realm of construct on the concept of system, and to the philosophical theory of "technology manufacturing" the elements and procedures to regulate and correct all aspects of social life. In addition to the early dialogue, "the virtues of a technological analogy" and "the political analogy," now we see a "language of a technical analogy": "the elements and procedures of the natural elements of the program to penetrate into the language of his correction, normative interpretation of the. Plato continue to cite carpenter manufacturing shuttle as the object of analogy: on the one hand, said his eye view "a natural fit to weave thing" or "the shuttle itself", namely "shuttle concept." this is the said, shuttle is a tool for weaving and knitting cloth, regardless of cloth or thick or thin, or cotton or hemp, used to shuttle the tool. This is emphasized all the specific things of the same kind of the same concept. But on the other hand on, "the carpenter and must use wood to naturalness for in every type of weaving shuttle made out" 389b8-cl that produced best suited to the needs of the different materials of various special shuttle, in addition to general shuttle concept as a tool of general model, also need to all kinds of special shuttle concept model as a tool in detail.
The researchers agreed that Platon is in the "on the level of philosophy is to distinguish" and "layers of ideas". (cf.Luce, Calvert, P-24; P. 34; AdemoUo pp., 129 - 132) for the relationship between the two, apparently, the latter, each kind of level "concept" corresponds to a different, specific, special things (woven linen woven linen with "shuttle shuttle concept", weaving shuttle woven cotton padded with "shuttle concept"), but a "level is the concept of" all "" must be implemented using the same the material (both woven linen or cotton weaving shuttle shuttle will be made of wood instead of iron). This is to eliminate the arbitrary nature of the technology manufacturing activities at the two levels, and thus emphasize the two levels of the nature of the inevitable":
一方面，立法者或制名师”上观名称之理念“,这是”属层次上的理念“,”属层次上的名称之理念“;另一方面，他还知道如何把”自然地契合于每一个事物的名称（的理念）“,用作为材料的声音和音节实现出来，所谓的”专属的名称之理念“就是”种层次上的名称之理念“.（389d8 -390al0）关于这两者之间的区别与联系，卡恩认为，恰如”梭子之理念“代表一个梭子的一般功能、它在编织活动中的作用，而一种特定类型的梭子的专属理念或本性，相应于它必须发挥的特殊具体的功能，同样，”名称之理念“代表任何名称都必须满足的一般条件、它在陈述中的作用‘而一个特殊的名称（即一个特殊事物的名称）的”eidos“或”phusis“则代表那个名称的特殊功能。 (Cf.Kahn, P. 162) "the idea of" the hierarchy of names "represents the general symbolic relationship required by the term" words "and" the exchange of truth ", which is a" basic "character"; and since the concept is the essence, the idea of "the" name "is the essence of the name. (cf. Ademollo, P. 133) and "level name bin philosophy" is as specified by the nature of things was named the same sign relations, with individual sth special symbols. (Cf.Kahn, P. 163), therefore, the relationship between the former and the latter is "general" and "individual", "a" and "more". (Calvert pp., 29-30 cf.) this way of thinking is helpful in solving the problem of the right of the name of the dialogue. The correct name should show the nature of things, and that the essence of things is to make the concept of symbol, because the idea is precisely to make knowledge into the eternal self identity (ousia) 0 therefore, in the genus level, the name of the right is to read the symbol; and at the level of the individual, the correctness of any individual name is to confirm, specify or sign a certain concept. For example, there is "the idea of a horse's name", "the concept of" justice ", and" the idea of the horse's name "will tell us a special name if it is the correct name of the horse must have what characteristics, the definition of justice's name will tell us a special name if it is the correct name of justice must have what characteristics. Obviously, any horse's name must provide information about the nature of the horse, justice is also the same. Ademollo (type/tokens), Kahn 164, p. 134,, cf., and P., the distinction between the meaning of the definition of a generic type is defined as a general type (which is a semantic type rather than a sound). Since each label are instantiations of the same type, the idea of the name of the horses in the level to provide the same information about the horse, then whether they by what letter or sound composition, as long as they sign the same concept, which is the same name, with equal correctness. Ake soft Er to the concept of the "level of name" as "concept (concept)" like what ": the ideal name but a non consists of sounds or letters in the semantic definition of the unit. In fact, it is the meaning of all the everyday names in a group of synonyms; people can call it the name of the concept (name-as-concept), because the same concept is expressed as a synonym. "(AckriU, P. 44). Plato, whether" type "or" concept ", as a non, non physical paradigm or standard not only restricts the teacher use sensible, physics letters and syllable structure specific name, is also a judge since ancient times, all kinds of name and its tectonic is correct only standard, and this is the Isocrates Lu" lengthy and tedious etymology analysis is based on the basic assumptions. In any case, as Kahn said, Platon mentioned the idea of "the name of the idea" to bring us back as the name of the symbol of the object from the name of the name of the structure of the sound, and eventually return to the name of the symbol of the idea. (Cf.Kahn, P. 165) thus, the idea as a natural essence, become the Platon counter attack artificial name theory of the doctrine of powerful weapon.
四
Socrates has distinguished tools from "manufacturing" with "the use of" as well as a tool for the "maker" with "users", the former production activities to be evaluated and supervised by the latter. Now, he put this distinction is applied to name that "legislators of the name of the work to the dialectical Legalism to supervision, if he wants to create a perfect name. "(390d7-8) on the" dialectical Legalists ", scholars are entangled in him and" legislators "or of teacher's relationship, but more important is" name "and" Dialectics "relationship. Or, as the "Isocrates Lu," the theme of "correct name" and as a right logos "technology" Plato's dialectic between the relationship. Ignoring this relationship will certainly underestimate the philosophical significance of the name theory and the position of the "Lu" in the whole Platon philosophy.
Dialectics is a kind of right "logos" in Platon's philosophy of technology, and a variety of popular false and harmful "logos" technology (such as rhetoric, sophistry and poetry) and tries to overcome the latter, give tit for tat, teach people; second, with the false "logos" different in content, the form of hole over arbitrary, dialectics as the correct "logos" to define the technology through finding the essence or concept as its essential content, and complemented by hypothesis method, deductive reasoning, strict memory partitioning and other related forms, based on the final, as "philosophy" the concept of "Platon theory" or the concept of the pronoun "Dialectics" is not only a way of argumentation, but as a whole, with "good idea" is the highest aim of teleological knowledge or technical system. You need to consider is the correct name, "" in the right "logos" technology is meaningless? Did Platon write "carat" is a surplus or just play a language game for pleasure? The answer is obviously negative.
First, the Isocrates Lu "in the" Socrates "in" under the label of "human conventionalism attack to proletarian Tegora technology on behalf of the rhetoric and sophistry and false" logos ", revealing the theory and practice of the absurd extreme relativism theory of possible catastrophic consequences. Clearly, the "Platon" theory of "the name of the" "name" theory "of the target and the" Dialectics "of the general goal is directly consistent. Secondly, and the modern scholars easily "the" "Lu", "the system name of the" is a language theory,"
The name "or" name "for Plato is idealism theory necessary links: the correct name is as the nature of the concept to be presented tools, strict definition is, of course, essence or concept the concept of content, it must be" external "forms of expression. It can be said that the non essential name is empty, the definition of the name is not blind; the name is the name of the Deputy real name, real name is known, with the definition of the right name or the essence of the physical, the sense of the representative, is the real sense of the concept of philosophy. The "pursuit" definition "and making" the right name "is to achieve the essence or the idea of the parallel is not surprising and complementary thinking process, Mr. Chen Kang describes the relationship between the two:" this close relationship is far beyond the surface of the similarity. First, the name is a part of the logos, here said the logos is generalized to thought or speech language expression and, consequently, also the definition. The name of the system is defined as a reference to all of this. Secondly, naming is the expression of the essence of things, which is defined as such a kind of expression; the expression of the two cases are ousia (essence). Third, the name is to use the name alone, and the definition is to combine the name with the use of. The two tools are names. Fourth, the essence of being expressed is the essence of the same thing, which is not analyzed and visualized in the former, and in the latter is the analysis of the understanding of things as a whole. According to the law, the essence, definition and name are interrelated in such a way that the latter is the content of the former. Their difference is only in the form of analysis, or in the form of an analysis. "(Chen, P. 94) name not only similar to define or is closely associated with the definition," carat "Lu Di" in the name etymology deals is defined, and is Plato's desire that really defining "because the process is actually defined people used to use a special symbolic meaning of things, the symbol represents the objective existence of things. If the system name is "encoding", then the "origin" is "decoding"; that is, once the ideal language is created, at least in theory.
We can reach the nature of things by the word of the word. On the contrary, in the face of the wrong name, any word analysis would be futile. Obviously, to ensure the effectiveness of etymological research is the name _ off and the name of the raw materials, methods and steps. To this end, Platon proposed the famous "imitation" method: to analyze the composite names to its components, i.e., as the original name (onomatay pwta's letters and syllables, consider their true value of imitation, they are recognized as the real elements of language, language has the smallest unit of semantic content, and then use them to imitate real elements. If yes, are active ingredients of wise men abuse etymology can also be correct "logos" technology. "Kratylos article" the naming theory exemplifies Platon with "technology (general theory form techney, model. Named of course is a form of legislation (Mmw), but not pure human nature legislation, and t is a technology based on nature (essence for all things "legislation", which contains the "unity" and "unity", in Platon seems to be "techne", is the ultimate source of all objectivity and certainty, but also the only way to the true beauty. Name can abuse made of abuse, but "correct name" only for dialectics as the right "logos" technique to prepare, only dialectical legalism qualifications and must use this tool to engage in the "dividing the essence and teaching job, to perfection, just as the eyes is to Practical Astronomy and ultimately to philosophy. Accordingly, the language philosophy of the study of the "Lu Lu" is not covered, but it is the metaphysical dimension of Platon "s thought.
Reference
ackrill, j., 1997, "language and reality in plato's cratylus, r, in ackrill, essays on plato and aristotle, oxford.
ademollo, f., "2011 'the cratylus of plato: a commentary. cambridge.
barney, r., 2001, names and nature in plato 's cratylus, routledge.
baxter, t. m. p., 1992, the cratylus; plato 's critique of naming t bril.
calvert, b. '1970' forms and flux in plato's cratylus "shortly.
chen, c. h., 1982, "onomatopoeia in plato's cratylus, apeiron 16.
kahn, c., 1973, "language and ontology in the cratylus, lee, moureiatos & rorty (eds.), exegesis and argumefu, new york.
kretzmann, n., 1971, "plato on the correctness of names", in american philosophical quarterly 8.
luce, j. v. in 1965, "theory of ideas in the cratylus1 * in shortly ten.
reeve, c. d. c., 1998, plato \ cratylus, indianapolis.
robinson, r., 1969, "theory of names in plato's crarylusn, robinson, essays in greek philosophyt oxford.
- sedley, d. 2003, plato 's cratylus, cambridge.